Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to alinuxinterfaceforonaccess scanning

douglas.leeder
2008-08-15T13:29:00Z

malware-list-bounces@dmesg.printk.net wrote on 2008-08-15 14:22:27:

> malware-list-bounces@dmesg.printk.net wrote on 2008-08-15 14:16:21:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 08:57:48AM -0400, Press, Jonathan wrote:
> > > That may just be a question of terminology. If the bits are
construed
> > > not as clean/dirty/infected, but as "I care about this file" vs. "I
> > > don't care about this file" then the rubber gloves come off.
> >
> > Sure, as long as we're very clear about the semantics of the bits. If
> > the bits are not persistent, but which get dropped if the inode is
> > every evicted from memory, and it's considered OK, or even desirable,
> > to rescan the file when it is brought back into memory, that may be
> > acceptable to the rubber gloves folks (make people go through lots
> > superflous of security scans, even when they are transfering betewen
> > flights --- security is always more important than passengers'
> > convenience!), but perhaps not to other applications such as file
> > indexers, who would view rescanning files that have already been
> > scanned, and not have been modified, as a waste of time, battery, CPU
> > and disk bandwidth, etc.
> >
> > As I understand it, the TALPA proposal had non-persistent
> > clean/dirty/infected bits.
> >
> > - Ted
>
> Yes the current proposal has temporary markers in the in-memory
> representation if inodes.
>
> This is a problem for current anti-malware scanning, as virus data
updates
> come every few hours
> (at which point the entire clean/infected state has to be cleared), so
the
> loss after a reboot is
> limited.

Of course I mean't NOT a problem...

--
Douglas Leeder

Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon,
OX14 3YP, United Kingdom.

Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20.